battlefieldfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Equipment Templates
How about it? - Comments My only concern about the equipment templates is that they're too long. Would it be possible to get the 2 factions side-by-side, rather than on top of each other. That way, there's less wasted space - 10:50, September 4, 2011 (UTC) It's just long because most of the possible slots are filled up, the current method of using the equipment templates (1 for each faction) is equally as long. Also, I'm not exactly sure on how to make the two side-by-side unfortunately, so I'll probably need help from someone. :I'll have a look to see if I can get them side by side. - 12:08, September 4, 2011 (UTC) ::Have a look at User:Bondpedia/Sandbox1. There are 2 templates - one basic, and the other has 2 of the basic in columns, so you can have a single column, or 2 columns. Only problem is, with 2 columns, it's too wide for the infobox, so it'd have to go below the infobox. - 12:27, September 4, 2011 (UTC) :::By the way, it includes all of the parameters from all the different sub-templates we currently have, so all the old ones can be deleted but the universal replacement could still retain game-individual parameters - 13:37, September 4, 2011 (UTC) :::I don't really get what you mean, is it in a single template? I can't really tell form the source of the Sandbox page. ::::Yes, the 2 columned template is a single template, but is itself composed of 2 sub-templates, which can also be used individually - 16:37, September 4, 2011 (UTC) ::::Ahh...I see. Looks good. You mean like this fail at devils perch that I did. For the us base on 16 player match-Slopijoe - nanodesu 11:20, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Small vehicle icons I don't think we should have them. It isn't as neat as the small flags and kit icons and not all vehicles have renders released. :I agree - 13:33, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Since this part of the debate seems to have dried up, I've gone ahead and implemented my proposal for the equipment template. All of the old templates now redirect to, and hence show up as, Template:Equipment. Furthermore, if people want to go ahead and start merging the 2 factions into a single template, you can use Template:Equipment2, as shown below - 16:50, September 9, 2011 (UTC) Military Units Templates I'm think about making templates that group all the Military Units of a faction togther (Example: Spetsnaz, Russian Ground Forces and Red Army) for those countries that have specified units in Battlefield games like the U.S, Russia, South Vietnam, North Vietnam. Example of the template: South Vietnam's version Thoughts? - Comments Im sorta of suporting but the Viet Cong is not in any reason related to the nva.but I think it's a good idea. Speaking of factions I'm thing we should do the victory and defeated themes for factions for bf2-Slopijoe - nanodesu 09:22, September 4, 2011 (UTC) For the North Vietnam, I was actually thinking of combining both the North Vietnam and Viet Cong as the Viet Cong only as 2 identified units in the game (C-10 Saigon Sapper Battalion and 2nd Viet Cong Regiment) while the North Vietnam has many more identified ones (66th N.V.A. Regiment, 33rd N.V.A. Regiment). And for the faction defeat themes, you could probably find them on youtube, but we'll need to find somewhere to embed them. I'll give them to you when I find them on your talk page And I'm gonna keep editing the vietnam load-outs for some of them.some of them are just forgotten.and should we have the the first Calvery page(when we make one) include bc2 nam as there are some hueys with there insignia I'll help as much as I can with you-Slopijoe - nanodesu 09:52, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Ok, but we will have to wait for other opinions before starting on it. Roger that I sent you the rebels pair of themes. For now that f-ing stupid class load out that no one seems to care about.-Slopijoe - nanodesu 10:08, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Good idea DG65 - 10:48, September 4, 2011 (UTC) I made a poll I'm suggesting that I'll put you in the support faction bond-Slopijoe - nanodesu 10:54, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Can I just suggest a small change. Rather than call it Template:US Military, how about Template:Forces/USA. Then we can more easilly follow up with others perhaps; Template:Forces/Russia, Template:Forces/UK, etc. - 12:32, September 4, 2011 (UTC) I would suggest making the individual divisions of each force smaller using the tags. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 16:44, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Done, the templates are now named Forces/*Insert Faction Here* and indiviual units a now using the tags. Voting Support - As per opening section Support - Would work brilliantly on the faction pages I'm currently cleaning-up - 10:48, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Support - I like as said in comments-Slopijoe - nanodesu 10:54, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Support - per all. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 13:06, September 4, 2011 (UTC) Support/Comment - Well damn, I spend a weekend moving in to college and I missed all this. Go for it; it looks much better than what we've been doing and is simpler. The within-template picture idea could cause problems for BF2 and 1942 since we don't have HQ renders of all the vehicles, but it would certainly work for BC2. Also, there are no specific units in BF2MC, DEath, they are generic for all factions. 21:09, September 5, 2011 (UTC) Support - Looks very good as well as increases organization. --Sp3cSprechen 17:31, September 10, 2011 (UTC) There seems to be clear support for this, plus both elements have already been implimented - neither of them really needed a vote anyway. So I'm going to archive this unless someone adds anything soon - 12:56, September 10, 2011 (UTC) }}